As one of the original Atari VCS programmers hired at
Atari, he created some of the first sports and casino games for that system
(along with 2 of the most influential programming tricks ever invented) before
taking a ‘gamble’ and leaving Atari for greener pastures at Activision. His
hitting streak continued with more ground-breaking sports games, helping
Activision to ‘stampede’ over their competitors. When the industry crash of the
mid-80s hit, he left to join the starting line-up at Accolade, enabling his
career to go into ‘extra innings’.

Bob Whitehead:I was hired in January, 1977, as one of Atari’s first programmers for
their new programmable game machine, the VCS 2600, by Bob Brown, who only months
before had left as my boss at a Department of Defense Contractor for Atari.

Atari VCS Star Ship (left); Atari coin-op Starship 1
(right)

Early Atari
ads showing Star Ship with its original title, Space Mission

DP:Star Ship
was your first game with Atari, which featured an innovative 1st-person
perspective. This was a port of Atari’s Starship 1 coin op, but early Atari ads
showed Star Ship titled as Space Mission. Was this the original name for
it? And if so, do you recall why it was changed seemingly right before release?

Bob Whitehead:Beats me. Using the arcade title made a lot more sense. I didn’t have a
direct line to the marketing department and they didn’t exactly consult us
programmers themselves.

Original VCS system box (1977)
showing the chess piece artwork

DP:According to
Larry Wagner, Video Chess was developed as a direct result of a customer
who complained that the (original) VCS system box showed a picture of chess, but
that no chess game existed. Did this person actually sue Atari over that (and if
so, did they win?). How difficult was the development process, and where did the
idea for the “Venetian blinds” technique originate?

Bob Whitehead:Box art has always been a problem in our industry. How do you communicate
to a consumer what’s inside, at the same time sell an image and make it “pop” on
the self. Combine that with a marketing group who’s not experienced in consumer
electronics and you’ve got trouble. Consumer electronics, unlike many “Procter
and Gamble” type products, is a business selling to a very savvy bunch of
patrons. Plus at the time, the computer chess game segment was an important
genre in the very early stages of the home computer gaming business. Atari felt
they had to address it. Unfortunately, those games at the time were simple text
driven interfaces with no graphics, and putting “chess pictures” on the box
didn’t strike the powers-to-be how difficult a task it would be to pull off. I
do remember discussions in the lab of how “stupid” it was to assume we can do a
chess game and how “impossible” it was to do. And that’s all I needed … you see
the word “impossible,” it seems, has always been one of my “igniters” - it gets
the puzzle solver in me going.

As for lawsuits, I don’t remember anything like that.
Venetian blinds came about like any other programming technique. Building and
improving on the previous technique with some insight is my first answer to your
question. But a better answer is, “just being driven to want more visually,” a
distinctive motivator, I think, of the gamer’s mind. A very critical feature of
the architecture of the Atari 2600 was the hardware designer’s decision to put
the graphic display power in the hands of the programmer. Really, once the
programmer understood that almost everything in the graphics chip could be
“changed on the fly,” techniques began to evolve as the necessities of invention
drove the process. It usually is the case even today, the software guys know
more about a system’s capabilities than the hardware guys could ever dream of
knowing. And there is the programmer in me who misses the direct access to the
hardware in today’s machines.

DP:You did the
1st versions of baseball and football for the VCS (Home Run
and Football respectively). Back in 1978, there was an interview in the
New York Times with Nolan Bushnell. In it, he mentioned there was a story about
one of them (possibly Home Run) in which the game had to be reprogrammed at one
point because it didn’t exactly follow the rules of the sport. To
quote - "Mr. Bushnell recalled that the video game Home Run was originally
assigned to an engineer who didn't know the rules of baseball. As a result, he
created a game in which a batter who swung at a ball and missed was credited
with a ball instead of a strike. The mistake has since been corrected." Do you
recall this being the case, or was it just a simple mistake that you caught and
fixed?

Bob Whitehead:What could have happened was that Nolan got a beta version (EPROM
version). It was common back then to disperse EPROM versions for testing and to
give the rest of the company a look at a "not quite yet final" version. And
nothing is more exhilarating and ego-boosting than to find a bug. I still get
off on it, and even to this day have a knack for it. I don’t remember
reprogramming any of my games once they were released, or even after an alpha or
beta (early playing version) version. Yes, tweaking playability and fixing bugs
just before release dictated a few changes, but they were usually minimal until
release. Once released, there were no bugs, only “features.” I was careful and
fortunate enough to avoid any debilitating bugs in any of my releases.

DP:Blackjack
was the first game to rewrite copied player graphics on the fly, which was a
major breakthrough! This led to the development of the first moving
6-character object. How did the superior sequel, Casino (which may have
been the first ‘sequel’ game for the VCS) come about?

Bob Whitehead:If I remember right, Casino really became my design goal somewhere in the
middle of Blackjack, but I released Blackjack for the short term (it was
important to pump out product!). Also, if my memory serves me right, Casino was
a larger size ROM (more expensive part), which played a factor (Ed: Blackjack
is 2K, whereas Casino is 4K).

DP:At
Activision, you helped design the development system that was used to program all
of their games. Can you explain a bit about its creation and how it worked?

Bob Whitehead:Dave Crane, with some help from some simple reverse engineering and a
little input from Al Miller, designed the hardware, and I wrote the debugger
software. Simply, it was a ROM simulator with a RS-232 terminal interface which
plugged into an Atari cartridge slot. You would download an assembled (object
code) program and then run it in a simple debugging environment. The system
needed a cross-compiling and source editing environment provided by a
mini-computer to assemble the program. A “dumb terminal” was used as the
interface to the development system and the mini-computer.

Boxing (left) was based on an
unreleased Atari coin-op game called Boxer (right)

DP:Your first 2
titles there were sports games – Boxing and Skiing. I suppose it
goes without saying that you’re quite a sports fan! Were there any that
you actively played? Were these game ideas ones you had planned on doing at
Atari?

Bob Whitehead:I, like many kids growing up, was an athlete “want-a-be” with some
athletic ability (but no real talent), so I dabbled in them all. Sports are my
personal fantasy and (as all good game designers should) I started there, but to
answer your question, no. I guess I’m not so visionary, as I’ve never had a 5
year game design plan, nor have I ever thought much past my current project.
Once a game is finished, I go through a little withdrawal, figure out what makes
sense to do next, and dive into the next project.

DP:Chopper
Command seems obviously inspired by Defender, but the result is a
much more attractive and cleaner display than Atari’s version. I’ve always been
impressed by the fact that Activision could essentially take a similar game and
do it better than Atari’s own version (ex. Night Driver – Enduro;
Battlezone – Robot Tank; etc.)

Bob Whitehead:It’s the difference between ownership and hired “towel designers” (that
was a derogatory label
given to Atari’s programmers by its president, who
had come from Ralph Lauren, which meant to us “run of the mill, creative
talent”). It was our company and we took it personal. Setting the bar high was
the only way, and the competitive spirit flowed though our veins.

DP:With
Stampede, I’ve heard that an early version of this exists (called Rodeo),
and that it possibly was started while you were at Atari. Are either of these
rumors true?

Bob Whitehead:No. Ah, the dark side of competition, jealousy and lies. (Ed: this
rumor likely started over the planned Stampede clone for the Interton VC4000
system, which was titled Rodeo.)

Atari VCS (left) and
Intellivision (right) versions of Stampede

DP:I noticed
that VCS Stampede also makes use of your Venetian blinds trick. Although this was
used in several games at Atari (such as Football, Polo, and Space
Invaders), it was also used by other companies, besides Activision.
According to David Crane, it also played a part in Atari’s lawsuit against
Activision, which led to him creating the now-famous Venetian blinds demo. Did
the fact that Stampede used this programming trick prompt Atari to file their
lawsuit, or was it a matter of them pre-empting any use of it by others?

Bob Whitehead:Lawsuits are used by big companies to limit competition even though its
legal merits are few. And unfortunately, it works.

DP:Although not
all of Atari's lawsuits were frivolous or baseless (in a lot of cases they were
simply protecting their property - the case against Odyssey 2's K.C. Munchkin
being a good example) but to go after companies who want to make software for
their systems...that just shows how short-sighted their president (Kassar)
really was. The suit against Activision though seemed more 'spiteful' than any
other case they initiated. It makes for a very interesting "what if" scenario,
if they had been successful...

Bob Whitehead:Don't get me wrong! I am a business man, too. And intellectual property
rights are important to protect, as well as that discovery process of finding
out if you have a case or not. But there is also the intimidation process that
occurs with customers and consumers you compete for, that flirts with the dark
side of business ethics. If you can label a competitor as a "thief," even for a
short time, it gives you a distinct advantage. Some of the intimidation tactics
of our customers were not always so subtle. It tests your competitive skills.

DP:Sky Jinks
is very much like a “reverse” Skiing with improved visuals and gameplay. It’s
hard to believe that they’re both the same size (2k)! It also uses your Venetian
blinds trick in a very subtle way. Was this used in any other Activision games?

Bob Whitehead:The Venetian blind technique is a very simple visual implementation of
the general technique of repositioning the sprites (or high resolution graphic
stamps) and displaying them on the next line or later on in the screen, giving
the appearance that the hardware has more than 2 sprites. In a general sense all
the Activision games used this technique with more and more frequency and skill
as time went on.

DP:Your last
VCS game, Private Eye, was a real visual treat. The display and game
design really
showed your 7+ years of experience! What was the inspiration for this game?

Bob Whitehead:Fantasy, once again. Everyone loves a mystery.

DP:You left
Activision, along with Al Miller, to start Accolade. What was happening at
Activision at that point that caused all the founders to leave within a few
years? I was always under the impression that the four of you (David, Alan,
Larry, and yourself) owned Activision, along with perhaps Jim Levy…

Bob Whitehead:We owned stock, Jim had a little more than us designers, but the VC’s got
the controlling interest. We were insiders, so selling stock was a no-no, but
the market had turned and our stock was a tenth of what it was…and moral wasn’t
so good. We felt that diversification was a big part of the problem and
computers, such as the C-64, were a growing segment. And we weren’t naive kids
anymore - opportunity knocked!

DP:At Accolade
you developed 2 titles (for the C-64) - HardBall and 4th & Inches.
I doubt that any other VCS programmer has done as many sports titles, so it’s
not surprising (but ironic) that your first 2 sports titles were again baseball
and football! It’s also amazing to see how progressive Hardball is to Home Run.
Was the look and perspective of these games influenced by any earlier titles,
such as Colecovision’s sports games?

Bob Whitehead:No, by watching TV! Understand my job as a game designer is to bring
freshness to some familiar fantasy. The perspective of Hardball is just a
reproduction of the very familiar centerfield camera, which was the first game
to use that (Ed: Colecovision's Super Action Baseball preceded
HardBall by 2 years).

DP:After you
became VP of Product Development at Accolade, you no longer did any game
design/programming. Did you ever consider getting back into game
design/programming? Lately it seems a number of former 2600 programmers have
gravitated to web-based or cell-based game design…

Bob Whitehead:The casual gaming cell-based business has been getting the juices flowing
again.

(below) Receiving some well-deserved
‘accolades’ at the 2003 Game Developer’s Conference, along with David Crane and
Alan Miller

DP:Can you
describe your career, between Accolade and now, and why you left the video game
industry?

Bob Whitehead:I would consider myself a driven man, business-wise. Yet, I never
considered myself very ambitious on the personal side. And I like new
challenges, too. Even though I seemed to be very focused on the start-ups back
then, my God and my family, still, were prime. I had some success (it’s never
enough), but it was time to give back to God and spend time with “the fam”.
Helping personally with low income families, getting non-profit religious
start-ups going, spending time in the garden, and staying under the radar has
consumed much of my time in the last decade or so.

DP:Were there
any games that you started, but didn't finish or get released? Also, do you
recall any other titles that others were working on but weren't released?

Bob Whitehead:It seems I always finished what I started.

DP:Were the
games that you wrote ones that were chosen or assigned?

Bob Whitehead:No game titles were ever assigned me. Even though I had full control over
what I did next I don’t remember ever doing a game where pier influence and
input from the business side didn’t play a role. I look at myself as team
player.

DP:Are there
Easter eggs in any of your titles?

Bob Whitehead:No. I’m not the hacker type.

DP:Do you still
own any of your games for these systems?

Bob Whitehead:Yes, I've got a few around, although I'm still going through the base
units. I've had to replace a few. Thank goodness there are still some around at
these swap meets and on eBay.

DP:Which of
your titles are your favorite, and what games in general?

Bob Whitehead:I’m most proud of Stampede and Hardball. One of my all-time classic
favorites is Missile Command.

DP:Outside of
shows like CGE, do you ever see any of your old fellow 2600 programmers?

Bob Whitehead:Occasionally I’ll catch someone at the Game Developers Conference. But it
is a “senior moment” when I run into one of their kids.

DP:What are
your thoughts on how the industry has evolved?

Bob Whitehead:Too dark and derivative for my taste. The console and computer gaming
business is too narrowly-defined by the 14-year-old male mentality and all his
not-so-honorable fantasies. It's being driven by what has worked and afraid of
what a 10 million dollar development bust will entail. It has lost its moral
compass.

DP: You're not
alone in that assessment, but can you foresee a time when the industry will turn
its main focus back onto the general casual-gaming public again?

Bob Whitehead:The wireless cell phone business is forcing the issue since half the
audience is female. I really like the creative challenge of looking at a
different audience, although you will still see the old Bob in my titles going
forward, too. I'm no fool.